Reading Subaltern Studies, introduction Introduction A Brief History of Subalternity David Ludden Subaltern Studies1 began its impressive career in England at the end of the 1970s, when conversations on subaltern themes among a small group of English and Indian historians led to a proposal to launch a new journal in India. Oxford University Press in New Delhi agreed instead to publish three volumes of essays called Subaltern Studies:Writings on South Asian History and Society. These appeared annually from 1982 and their success stimulated three more volumes in the next five years, all edited by Ranajit Guha. When he retired as editor in 1989, Ranajit Guha and eight collaborators2 had written thirty-four of forty-seven essays in six Subaltern Studies volumes, as well as fifteen related books.3 By 1993, the group he remembers as originally being “an assortment of marginalized academics”4 had sufficient international prestige that a Latin America Subaltern Studies Group was inspired "by this interdisciplinary organization of South Asian scholars led by Ranajit Guha."5 Today, ten (and counting) Subaltern Studies volumes have appeared. They include essays by forty-four authors whose allied publications approach two hundred, including translations in several languages,6 yet the core group still includes eight founders7 and Ranajit Guha’s “intellectual driving force”8 is still visible. Readings of Subaltern Studies began in India, where writing about Subaltern Studies began in book reviews. At first, each volume in the series was reviewed separately as collection of essays, but by 1986, an accumulation of writing inside and outside the project had established a distinctive school of research whose adherents came to be called "subalternists" or simply, "subalterns." Their seminal essays appeared in paperback in 1988, when Selected Subaltern Studies was published by Oxford University Press in New York and Oxford, edited by Ranajit Guha and Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, with a foreword by Edward Said. By 1990, Burton Stein could cite the growing interest in Subaltern Studies as one sign that the 1980s were "a decade of historical efflorescence" in South Asian studies.9 In the 1990s, Subaltern Studies became a hot topic in academic circles on several continents; a weapon, magnet, target, lightning rod, hitching post, icon, gold mine, and fortress for scholars ranging across disciplines from history to political science, anthropology, sociology, literary criticism, and cultural studies. I have compiled Reading Subaltern Studies to provide a non-subalternist introduction to Subaltern Studies.10 The book brings together a dozen essays published in South Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America, from 1983 to 1997. Authors of these essays have all made their mark on the intellectual history of subalternity, each in their own way, in their own place and time, outside Subaltern Studies. Each interprets subalternity contextually. In the introduction, my main task is to outline a history of contextuality at the intersection of Subaltern Studies and its readership, and in doing this I also indicate how the subject of subalternity has changed over the years. My goal is not to formulate a critique, to assess the merits, or to measure the contribution of Subaltern Studies -- let alone to unravel the inner history of the project -- but rather to inform reading and discussion. 1 Reading Subaltern Studies, introduction Subaltern Studies does not mean today what it meant in 1982, 1985, 1989, or 1993. How did this change occur? Intellectual environments have changed too much to allow us to measure cause-and-effect in particular acts of writing and reading. Change has occurred inside the Subaltern Studies project, but ambiguously, as we will see, and how much internal change is cause or effect of external change is unknowable, because inside and outside, subaltern subjects have been reinvented disparately. When approaching the intellectual history of subalternity, it will not do to imagine that Subaltern Studies dropped a weighty stone into a quiet pond, or to trace the influence of teachers and students, or to speculate that cutting-edge ideas have dispersed globally like news on the internet. This book proposes instead that a compact but complex history of reading and writing has constituted the subject of subalternity in a widening world of scholarship, where some readers accept and others reject the claim that Subaltern Studies represents the real substance of subalternity, even in India. The intellectual history of subalternity has emerged outside and in opposition to Subaltern Studies as much as inside it. Academic work on subaltern themes quickly detached subalternity from its various inventors. Migrations of reading dispersed research on subaltern themes connected by circulating terminologies, arguments, and texts. As we will see, outside forces moulded the project itself, and its own institutional boundaries have always been permeable. Its internal coherence has been less intellectual than personal and more formal than substantive, being composed primarily by group loyalties and by invitations to join Subaltern Studies activities. Intellectual cohesiveness has never been a project priority, as the leaders often say, and it has appeared primarily in solidarity against critics. Outsiders have built outer walls for Subaltern Studies and landscaped its environment to dramatize its distinctiveness. Respondents, interlocutors, interpreters and translators have worked with Subaltern Studies material and redefined it by writing about it differently. Insiders have become outsiders. Outsiders have become insiders. Outsiders doing independent work on subaltern themes have embraced Subaltern Studies as a kindred project, for example, in a 1994 collection of essays in the American Historical Review.11 This book provides a reference guide for reading Subaltern Studies in a world context, and most of that context is outside India, though Subaltern Studies and essays reprinted here primarily concern India. Subaltern Studies occupies a subject position inside India, but is written for readers everywhere. Outside India, it is often the only brand of Indian history that readers know by name, but other brands are more powerful. National narratives, orientalist images, ethnic stereotypes, and Hindu majoritarianism are vastly more influential.12 In opposition to these, subalterns have made little headway. Readings of the Indian history contained in Subaltern Studies are inflected variously by national contexts in the world of globalisation. Peter Gran argues, for instance, that in India, Subaltern Studies is read against liberalism, Marxism, and “religious fascism,” whereas in the US, its "principal novelty" is its ability to represent India by being read into ideologies of difference and otherness.13 Though globalisation circulates texts and ideas around the world, it nonetheless divides reading environments. In the US, readers are generally encouraged to think about cultures in essentialist terms, in the ethnographic present; to see colonialism and nationalism as cultural phenomena; to disdain Marxism; and to distance academic work from partisan politics, a separation that bolsters academic credibility. But in South Asia, cultural change preoccupies scholars and activists, colonialism includes capitalist imperialism (which is still at work in the world of globalisation), 2 Reading Subaltern Studies, introduction Marxism is alive, and most scholars embrace politics in one form or another as a professional responsibility of citizenship. Such contextual differences differentiate readings of subalternity. To map the whole world of contested meanings lies far beyond the scope of this book, which endeavours, more modestly, to locate Subaltern Studies in the context of relevant English- language scholarship. Historical Origins: Insurgency, Nationalism, and Social Theory In the last forty years, scholars have produced countless studies of societies, histories, and cultures "from below" which have dispersed terms, methods, and bits of theory used in Subaltern Studies among countless academic sites. Reflecting this trend, the 1993 edition of The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary included "history" for the first time as a context for defining “subaltern.” The word has a long past. In late-medieval English, it applied to vassals and peasants. By 1700, it denoted lower ranks in the military, suggesting peasant origins. By 1800, authors writing “from a subaltern perspective” published novels and histories about military campaigns in India and America; and G.R.Gleig (1796-1888), who wrote biographies of Robert Clive, Warren Hastings, and Thomas Munro, mastered this genre. The Great War provoked popular accounts of subaltern life in published memoirs and diaries; and soon after the Russian Revolution, Antonio Gramsci (1891- 1937) began to weave ideas about subaltern identity into theories of class struggle. Gramsci was not influential in the English-reading world, however, until Raymond Williams promoted his theory in 1977, well after translations of The Modern Prince (1957) and Prison Notebooks (1966) had appeared.14 By 1982, Gramsci’s ideas were in wide circulation.15 Ironically, though Gramsci himself was a Communist activist whose prison notes were smuggled to Moscow for publication and translation, scholars outside or opposed to Communist parties (and to Marxism) have most ardently embraced his English books (as well as those of the Frankfurt School). Subaltern Studies